CIA Concludes Russia Interfered In Election To Help Trump Win

[jc456]

2002. Wasn't it through the CIA the bogus intel on WMD reached Cheney's office? So, for starters, Saddam Hussein.

The CIA and other agencies collect data. It's up to elected and appointed leaders to determine what to do with it.

Example; it wasn't the CIA's decision to invade Iraq or choose to simply carpet bomb all of Saddam's non-compliant "palaces". They simply presented what they have up through the chain of command. It's ultimately up to the CiC to make a decision as to what action to take, if any. In some cases, such as Iraq, the CiC can go to Congress and ask for their support. While much of data was classified, Congressional armed services and intelligence committees had the same data the President had.

But they did state WMDs were there correct? Was there?

Wouldn't you think that influenced the leaders?

 

[mudwhistle]

Thank you Muhammed! That photo is the proof we've all been searching for! We now know WITHOUT A DOUBT that it was Hillary herself who told Vlado of her criminal escapades! NO HACKING!

Nope.
It shows that Hillary has close ties to Putin.

Forget about all of the Uranium she turned over to them. Forget about Obama shutting down the Shuttle program so Russia could take over our shuttle service to the Space Station. Forget about all of that stuff.

 

[jc456]

Why are people upset that there might have been a few illegal immigrants involved in the vote...but have no problem when a foreign power does so?

Show a foriegn power that voted?

It doesn't matter if it's true or not...that's not the point...there are people on this forum and elsewhere saying that it would be a good thing if they did it.
Imagine that!

Yes. That is the bottom line. Hitlery's life of crime is now exposed and we have someone to thank for it. Whether it was Chelsea Manning, Vlado Putin, Kim Sung-one, or Jimmy Hoffa ..... the world owns him/them the highest praise ever bestowed on another human being! Ding Dong!

Where was the intelligence agencies while all this supposed hacking was occurring?

It's been going on for years, not just lately. The thing about intelligence agencies is that if you reveal you know an enemy is doing something, that enemy may change their actions in order to avoid being "watched".

This is just another example of why we will hear of intelligence failures much more often than intelligence successes.

So where was the influence at? They couldn't of changed votes because nothing is online. So I'm sorry I'm confused how did they influence the election please somebody put something up that says how they did this

 

[Spare_change]

Might I suggest that most of you are missing the point ---

I have no doubt that the Russians "supported" hacking the DNC emails, and released information harmful to Hillary.

However, the point I think that is being missed is ------ every thing in those hacked emails was TRUE.

Complaining about the Russians doing it - and all nations do it -- is simply a subterfuge to try to deflect attention from the contents of the emails.

If I were you, I would worry more about what our own leaders were doing, than what the Russians were doing.

Don't get distracted by the shiny ball.

How do you know? Information in Wikileaks was changed and we know that Russia was behind it.

We KNOW that, do we???

Wow ---- you better call Washington --- they just THINK the possibility exists.

 

[mudwhistle]

Show a foriegn power that voted?

It doesn't matter if it's true or not...that's not the point...there are people on this forum and elsewhere saying that it would be a good thing if they did it.
Imagine that!

Yes. That is the bottom line. Hitlery's life of crime is now exposed and we have someone to thank for it. Whether it was Chelsea Manning, Vlado Putin, Kim Sung-one, or Jimmy Hoffa ..... the world owns him/them the highest praise ever bestowed on another human being! Ding Dong!

Where was the intelligence agencies while all this supposed hacking was occurring?

It's been going on for years, not just lately. The thing about intelligence agencies is that if you reveal you know an enemy is doing something, that enemy may change their actions in order to avoid being "watched".

This is just another example of why we will hear of intelligence failures much more often than intelligence successes.

So where was the influence at? They couldn't of changed votes because nothing is online. So I'm sorry I'm confused how did they influence the election please somebody put something up that says how they did this

They speculate that it happened without showing even a smidgen of proof....just like there wasn't a smidgen of proof Hillary broke the law by setting up a private server....

Journalists still smarting from an embarrassing loss are speculating that it happened.....so it must have.

 

[Divine Wind]

So GEORGE BUSH did not collect any 'bogus' Intel - he just reacted to the 'bogus' Intel he was given. I agree.

...and if the Intel the CIA provided then was so bogus, how can we know how reliable the Intel they are providing this time might be?

Intell is intell. Unless you are accusing the CIA of fabricating it, I fail to see how it could be "bogus".

Part of the problem is that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Congress cut not only the defense budget but also the budget of our intelligence services forcing more reliance on satellite surveillance over Human Intelligence (HUMINT) AKA ground assets. There's only so much we can tell from picture or radar image. That intell is passed along.

 

[easyt65]

Intell is intell. Unless you are accusing the CIA of fabricating it, I fail to see how it could be "bogus".

ME, accusing the CIA of fabricating Intel? Perish the thought - that's what the LIBERALS have been doing ever since the CIA reported Saddam Hussein had WMD.

 

[American_Jihad]

...

 

[Fang]

WHAT!? IF THIS IS

WHAT!? IF THIS IS TRUE and Russia helped Trump win, then I'd like to know where I can send a Thank You note.

Your a traitor then.

And deserves a cowardly traitors fate

Still butt hurt about President Elect Trump. Sucks to be you!

NOT my president Let the SB be yours You deserve it

You can act like a little child and whine all you want, but President-Elect Trump will be your President. There's not a damn thing you can do about it. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but swallow it you most certainly will. (reference TWD)

 

[cnelsen]

2002. Wasn't it through the CIA the bogus intel on WMD reached Cheney's office? So, for starters, Saddam Hussein.

The CIA and other agencies collect data. It's up to elected and appointed leaders to determine what to do with it.

Example; it wasn't the CIA's decision to invade Iraq or choose to simply carpet bomb all of Saddam's non-compliant "palaces". They simply presented what they have up through the chain of command. It's ultimately up to the CiC to make a decision as to what action to take, if any. In some cases, such as Iraq, the CiC can go to Congress and ask for their support. While much of data was classified, Congressional armed services and intelligence committees had the same data the President had.

If I remember correctly there were differing opinions within the CIA as to the authenticity of the "evidence" the CIA was relying on. Other US intel agencies as well as MI6 and the French intel were vehemently warning against the veracity of the evidence which was provided by a lone paid informant --Iraqi, I believe, but a disreputable toady. He was promised a big payout and ferried with his family to somewhere, no doubt, in the US .

All the voices raised against it said it was manufactured by Mossad. Mossad, btw, was of the opnion that the evidence was true as shit. This is the evidence Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Richard Perle (all three militant Zionists, and two of whom were dual US-Israeli citizens, and I think one was even a former member of the Israeli Knesset) used to launch the war from Dick Cheney's Pentagon office, with Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman, et al, cheering the way. These three, with an empty-headed US president blinking stupidly in tow, successfully launched the mighty American war machine against a puny country with an economy 1/10th the size of Denmark's that posed zero threat to us.

Four million Iraqis (two thirds of a Holocaust!!) subsequently perished, which ruffled some feathers. The hypersensitive Iraqis then formed ISIS and the horror show that that is. Yaaay, Mossad!!! When a duped Colin Powell went before the UN and made the US case for war based on the Israeli bullshit, the French ambassador to the UN committed the extreme breach of diplomatic protocol by holding a press conference in front of the UN right during Powell's speech. He begged us not to fall for this Israeli trick. For some reason, the US media forgot to cover the French ambassador's speech. But Colin Powell got wall-to-wall coverage along with effusive editorial references to Powell's majestic integrity and the awe-inspiring dignity and respect all the world held him in. (Since then, of course, he's finished).

Who wants to bet that the same wing in the CIA is the source of the "evidence" Russia runs our elections?

 

[Divine Wind]

2002. Wasn't it through the CIA the bogus intel on WMD reached Cheney's office? So, for starters, Saddam Hussein.

The CIA and other agencies collect data. It's up to elected and appointed leaders to determine what to do with it.

Example; it wasn't the CIA's decision to invade Iraq or choose to simply carpet bomb all of Saddam's non-compliant "palaces". They simply presented what they have up through the chain of command. It's ultimately up to the CiC to make a decision as to what action to take, if any. In some cases, such as Iraq, the CiC can go to Congress and ask for their support. While much of data was classified, Congressional armed services and intelligence committees had the same data the President had.

If I remember correctly there were differing opinions within the CIA as to the authenticity of the "evidence" the CIA was relying on. Other US intel agencies as well as MI6 and the French intel were vehemently warning against the veracity of the evidence which was provided by a lone paid informant --Iraqi, I believe, but a disreputable toady. He was promised a big payout and ferried with his family to somewhere, no doubt, in the US .

All the voices raised against it said it was manufactured by Mossad. Mossad, btw, was of the opnion that the evidence was true as shit. This is the evidence Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Richard Perle (all three militant Zionists, and two of whom were dual US-Israeli citizens, and I think one was even a former member of the Israeli Knesset) used to launch the war from Dick Cheney's Pentagon office, with Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman, et al, cheering the way. These three, with an empty-headed US president blinking stupidly in tow, successfully launched the mighty American war machine against a puny country with an economy 1/10th the size of Denmark's that posed zero threat to us.

Four million Iraqis (two thirds of a Holocaust!!) subsequently perished, which ruffled some feathers. The hypersensitive Iraqis then formed ISIS and the horror show that that is. Yaaay, Mossad!!! When a duped Colin Powell went before the UN and made the US case for war based on the Israeli bullshit, the French ambassador to the UN committed the extreme breach of diplomatic protocol by holding a press conference in front of the UN right during Powell's speech. He begged us not to fall for this Israeli trick. For some reason, the US media forgot to cover the French ambassador's speech. But Colin Powell got wall-to-wall coverage along with effusive editorial references to Powell's majestic integrity and the awe-inspiring dignity and respect all the world held him in. (Since then, of course, he's finished).

Who wants to bet that the same wing in the CIA is the source of the "evidence" Russia runs our elections?

Hindsight is 20/20. All the CIA or other intelligence agencies can do is collect the data, verify it the best they can and then present it up the chain of command.

Consider the intell going around prior to 9/11; reports of foreigners wanting to learn how to fly but not learn how to takeoff and land. Saudis who are on expired visas (like most illegals). Intell on various hijacking plots and a desire to attack the West by al-Qaeda. Looking back, we can connect the dots, but when all of that intell is buried among dozens, if not hundreds, of other reports about chemical attacks, bombs and other threats, it's difficult to see through all that fog.

The same goes with Iraq. There was intell coming out of there, but it was limited. It's not up to the FBI or CIA to make those decisions. It's their job to collect and assemble the intell for presentation. If asked what they think, they'll answer, but it's still a command decision, ultimately, by the CiC.

 

[Lewdog]

Intell is intell. Unless you are accusing the CIA of fabricating it, I fail to see how it could be "bogus".

ME, accusing the CIA of fabricating Intel? Perish the thought - that's what the LIBERALS have been doing ever since the CIA reported Saddam Hussein had WMD.

Hey numbnuts the U.S. had a defector Iraqi scientist that SAID they had WMDs. They didn't fabricate that. The guy only said after the fact that he lied.

 

[bornright]

More likely the hacker or hackers are Bernie Sander's supporters than the Russians.

 

[Johann]

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just toundermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”

Much more...

REPORT: CIA Concludes Russia Interfered In Election To Help Trump Win

Obama Demands Answers

More proof that Hillary was swiftboated. Her popular vote lead is now over 2.8 million. Trump was not fairly elected. Putin, Wikileaks, and Comey all had their thumbs on the scale for Trump - including other idiots who were pumping out conspiracy theories and fake news for fun and profit to discredit Hillary.

She wasn't swiftboated, she lost a free and fair election. If the media coverage had anything to do with it, Trump would have lost. All the Media was praising Hillary Clinton as a great, wise leader. The most experienced woman. They painted Trump as a misogynistic, racist bigot.

Let's face it, Hillary Clinton was a shit candidate. Anyone else would have walked over Trump, but you elected a candidate with the charisma of a rock and more baggage than vision. She didn't have the charisma or a vision to galvanize the supporters she needed to win.

Trump didn't win. Hillary Clinton lost.

You can blame 'fake news and conspiracy theories' for Hillary's failures, but that's all just bullshit and rationalizing. All wikileaks and purportedly putin did was expose Hillary, her campaign and the Democratic party's bullshit. Hillary and co have been crying "RUSSIA DID IT!" while ignoring what the emails actually exposed. I'm not saying Trump or the Reps were necessarily any better, but let's not just ignore the evidence just because of the source.

If anybody was swiftboated, it was Bernie Sanders by the DNC. It didn't help that the person responsible for the swiftboating was immediately hired by Clinton's campaign right after she resigned in disgrace from the chairmanship of the DNC. You can claim Comey had his finger on the scale for Trump, but Hillary has been in government for decades and had security briefings. She violated the policy of the State department and did some pretty shady shit. It's not like Comey went out of his way to **** over Clinton, he was certainly not liked by the Republicans. Hillary put herself in a position to be fucked by Comey and the FBI, not the other way around.

I don't see why you libs aren't exulting the election of Trump over, say, Ted Cruz. Yeah, sure, he talks a lot of shit and has no tact. But he's merely directly saying what has pretty much been U.S. policy for decades. In fact, his whole plan, if you had actually bothered to read it, is a mixture of liberal and conservative ideas.

The Republican Party is actually probably going to oppose him on a wide range of issues because he is to the left of the Republican Party on many of them. He is the first president elected into his first term while not opposing LGBT rights. He has tried to reach out to the black community by promising to rebuild their inner cities and schools, and lower crime.

This doom and gloom, perpetuated by the hysterical Mainstream Media(read: fake news) has actually blinded liberals to the fact Trump is probably the most left-leaning Republican elected in American history.

What i don't understand, is why people continue to believe what MSNBC says even after their 2016 prediction of a Hillary blowout. Liberals keep going back to the same vendors of lies and Propoganda and buying them out time after time, even when they get no returns. Maybe you should stop listening to MSNBC and listen to what trump is actually saying.

 

[easyt65]

Hey numbnuts the U.S. had a defector Iraqi scientist that SAID they had WMDs. They didn't fabricate that. The guy only said after the fact that he lied.

Look, I did not point out that there is only 'INTEL', not 'bogus' Intel. I was also not the one to point out that politicians do not collect Intel, they just act on what they are given. That argument just KILLED years of Liberals attacking Bush.

The CIA said Hussein had WMD.
- He either did or did not.

The scientist said Hussein had WMD, and it was up to the CIA and Intel to investigate and then provide the report to Bush.
- Bush, as pointed out by OTHERS, then acted based on the Intel he was given, as did Hillary and Liberals when they voted to give Bush the authority to take the country to war. (These liberals not only voted for it but argued that Hussein needed to be removed.)

Now back to the CIA...NOW - they now claim the Russians hacked the elections. IF the CIA was wrong 'then' who is to say they are right now?
- I don't know because we have seen no evidence, just been asked to take Hillary, Barry, and the CIA's word for it.

IF they are right and the Russians hacked the elections, forget Trump - what is the PRESIDENT going to do about it?

 

[JimH52]

Mitch McConnell backs a congressional investigation into Russian hacking

Sorry Donnie Boy. Your man Putin is now on notice. Maybe you can send him a Get Well card?

 

[Claudette]

Might I suggest that most of you are missing the point ---

I have no doubt that the Russians "supported" hacking the DNC emails, and released information harmful to Hillary.

However, the point I think that is being missed is ------ every thing in those hacked emails was TRUE.

Complaining about the Russians doing it - and all nations do it -- is simply a subterfuge to try to deflect attention from the contents of the emails.

If I were you, I would worry more about what our own leaders were doing, than what the Russians were doing.

Don't get distracted by the shiny ball.

How do you know? Information in Wikileaks was changed and we know that Russia was behind it.

We KNOW that, do we???

Wow ---- you better call Washington --- they just THINK the possibility exists.

Yup and they will run with it too.

The FBI came to a different conclusion.


But the Independent Journal Review was quick to point out that the FBI conducted a similar investigation weeks ago on behalf of Trump, which came to a very different conclusion:

For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.

 

[cnelsen]

2002. Wasn't it through the CIA the bogus intel on WMD reached Cheney's office? So, for starters, Saddam Hussein.

The CIA and other agencies collect data. It's up to elected and appointed leaders to determine what to do with it.

Example; it wasn't the CIA's decision to invade Iraq or choose to simply carpet bomb all of Saddam's non-compliant "palaces". They simply presented what they have up through the chain of command. It's ultimately up to the CiC to make a decision as to what action to take, if any. In some cases, such as Iraq, the CiC can go to Congress and ask for their support. While much of data was classified, Congressional armed services and intelligence committees had the same data the President had.

If I remember correctly there were differing opinions within the CIA as to the authenticity of the "evidence" the CIA was relying on. Other US intel agencies as well as MI6 and the French intel were vehemently warning against the veracity of the evidence which was provided by a lone paid informant --Iraqi, I believe, but a disreputable toady. He was promised a big payout and ferried with his family to somewhere, no doubt, in the US .

All the voices raised against it said it was manufactured by Mossad. Mossad, btw, was of the opnion that the evidence was true as shit. This is the evidence Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Richard Perle (all three militant Zionists, and two of whom were dual US-Israeli citizens, and I think one was even a former member of the Israeli Knesset) used to launch the war from Dick Cheney's Pentagon office, with Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman, et al, cheering the way. These three, with an empty-headed US president blinking stupidly in tow, successfully launched the mighty American war machine against a puny country with an economy 1/10th the size of Denmark's that posed zero threat to us.

Four million Iraqis (two thirds of a Holocaust!!) subsequently perished, which ruffled some feathers. The hypersensitive Iraqis then formed ISIS and the horror show that that is. Yaaay, Mossad!!! When a duped Colin Powell went before the UN and made the US case for war based on the Israeli bullshit, the French ambassador to the UN committed the extreme breach of diplomatic protocol by holding a press conference in front of the UN right during Powell's speech. He begged us not to fall for this Israeli trick. For some reason, the US media forgot to cover the French ambassador's speech. But Colin Powell got wall-to-wall coverage along with effusive editorial references to Powell's majestic integrity and the awe-inspiring dignity and respect all the world held him in. (Since then, of course, he's finished).

Who wants to bet that the same wing in the CIA is the source of the "evidence" Russia runs our elections?

Hindsight is 20/20. All the CIA or other intelligence agencies can do is collect the data, verify it the best they can and then present it up the chain of command.

Consider the intell going around prior to 9/11; reports of foreigners wanting to learn how to fly but not learn how to takeoff and land. Saudis who are on expired visas (like most illegals). Intell on various hijacking plots and a desire to attack the West by al-Qaeda. Looking back, we can connect the dots, but when all of that intell is buried among dozens, if not hundreds, of other reports about chemical attacks, bombs and other threats, it's difficult to see through all that fog.

The same goes with Iraq. There was intell coming out of there, but it was limited. It's not up to the FBI or CIA to make those decisions. It's their job to collect and assemble the intell for presentation. If asked what they think, they'll answer, but it's still a command decision, ultimately, by the CiC.

No. When there is that much at stake (we bombed cities, for the love of God), you ******* damn well better be sure the shit you present is verified, and if everyone else is screaming that the source of the info is unreliable, you don't bring it to the CiC. Feith, Wolfowitz, and Perle lied and are war criminals. In fact, in the Senate hearing convened to look into all this awkwardness, Committee Chairman Senator Levy of Michigan came to the conclusion that while, yes, the Three Menschketeers had lied (i.e., LIED!!!) about the WMD, it didn't actually rise to the level of a ******* crime. (I believe legally there has to be more than 10,000 dead American soldiers for it to qualify as an actual crime, not the mere 4,486 there actually were). Feith, Wolfowitz, and Perle are now living rich, happy, and free probably right here in the DC area and they didn't even have to pay back the six trillion dollars their lies cost us.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Mitch McConnell backs a congressional investigation into Russian hacking

Sorry Donnie Boy. Your man Putin is now on notice. Maybe you can send him a Get Well card?

Russian Hacking.....!!!!

Russian Hacking.....!!!!

Russian Hacking.....!!!!

Russian Hacking.....!!!!

Poor little bed-wetters.

 

[TomParks]

Poor Hill must want another run in 2020...go for it please!

The liberals and media are in such denial they are willing to start a war with Russia over Trump's victory